Why  I Am  Opposed 

to  the 

Interchurch 

World  Movement 


fBy 

I.  M.  HALDEMAN,  D.  D. 

Pastor,  First  Baptist  Church 
Broadway  and  79th  St.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 


PRICE  25  CENTS 


ERRATA 

Page  4,  4th  line — Holy  Scriptures  should  read — 
Holy  Scripture. 

Page  21,  2nd  line — protoe vangelium  should  read — 
protevangelium. 

Page  43,  15th  line — robes  should  read  robe. 

Page  48,  26th  line — atnosphere  should  read— 
atmosphere.  


Books  may  be  obtained  from 

H.  L.  DAY,  4 White  Street,  New  York. 


Why  I Am  Opposed 

to  the 

Interchurch 

World  Mov  ement 


I.  M.  HALDEMAN,  D.  D. 

Pastor,  First  Baptist  Church 
Broadway  and  79th  St.,  New  York,  N.  Y. 


PRICE  25  CENTS 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Columbia  University  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/whyiamopposedOOhald 


Why  1 am  Opposed  to  the 
Interchurch  World  Movement 

BY  I.  M.  HALDEMAN,  D.D. 

Pastor  First  Baptist  Church,  New  York  City,  N.  Y. 


I HAVE  received  inquiries  from  one  end  of  this 
country  to  the  other  concerning  my  attitude  to 
the  Interchurch  World  Movement.  These 
letters  have  been  written  by  pastors  of  all  denomina- 
tions expressing  doubts  about  it,  wishing  to  know 
whether  it  emphasizes  the  mind  of  Christ,  whether 
it  is  loyal  to  the  whole  Word  of  God  and  asking  my 
advice  as  to  their  own  action  in  respect  to  it. 

I have  endeavored  to  answer  them.  I have 
written  letter  after  letter,  but  they  still  come;  not 
a day  that  my  mail  is  not  filled  with  them,  until  I 
find  it  impossible  to  respond  to  all. 

Since  the  demand  has  taken  such  a universal, 
insistent  and  profoundly  sincere  manner  I feel 
myself  under  bonds  to  meet  it  in  this  public  and 
printed  way. 

I am  unqualifiedly  opposed  to  the  Movement 
and  neither  I nor  my  Church  will  have  aught  to  do 
with  it. 

I am  opposed  to  the  Interchurch  World  Move- 
ment for  manifold  reasons. 


3 


WHY  l AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Inter  church  Movement  is  purely  and  simply 
a Post-millennial  drive. 

Post-millennialism  has  neither  a sane  exegesis  nor 
a single  suggestion  of  Holy  Scriptures  to  support 
it. 

Post-millennialism  stands  squarely  and  offen- 
sively against  the  unvarying  Scripture  doctrine  of 
the  Second  and  Imminent  Coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

Post-millennialism  ignores  dispensational  dis- 
tinctions, mixes  truths  that  differ,  deludes  the 
Church  with  the  vain  hope  of  a world’s  conversion 
through  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  and  in  the  face 
of  our  Lord’s  solemn  declaration  that  this  age  will 
end  morally  and  under  swift  and  divine  judgment  as 
in  the  days  of  Noah,  continually  repeats  the  pleasing 
refrain  that  the  world  is  growing  better;  that  the 
new  world  movement  will  make  it  a decent  and  safe 
place  to  live  in;  that  step  by  step,  slowly  but  surely, 
it  is  being  led  forward  to  the  purple  and  gold  of 
millennial  days. 

Post-millennialism  is  the  ignis  fatuus  of  the 
Church,  the  false  light  that  shines  with  its  phos- 
phorescent glow  above  the  morass  of  an  unregenerate 
world  in  which  regenerate  lives  must  still  battle  with 
its  ever-ascending,  unabated  and  permeating  power 
of  sin. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is  the  combined, 
aggressive  effort  of  Post-millennialism  to  render 
meaningless  the  last  promise  of  an  ascended  Lord: 
“Surely  I come  quickly.” 


4 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


The  Interchurch  Movement  substitutes  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  for  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  does  so  by  con- 
founding the  one  with  the  other. 

The  kingdom  of  Christ  is  the  covenant  kingdom 
promised  to  the  people  of  Israel  and  rejected  by  the 
Jews  in  that  hour  when  they  blindly  rejected  the 
Son  of  God  as  their  true  Messiah  and  King. 

The  kingdom  of  Heaven  in  its  original  meaning 
was  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  having  its  source 
in  Heaven  and  its  field  of  display  on  earth. 

The  kingdom  of  Heaven  eventually  will  be  the 
establishment  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  when  He 
shall  come  a second  time  to  Jerusalem. 

The  kingdom  of  Heaven  in  this  age  is  the  pro- 
fession of  Christ,  not  as  a King,  but  as  the  rejected 
One,  crucified,  dead,  risen  again,  ascended  to  Heaven 
and  seated  there  as  a refugee  from  earth  till  God  the 
Father  shall  make  His  enemies  His  footstool.  In  the 
meantime  He  is  Redeemer  and  Saviour  of  all  who 
call  upon  Him  as  such. 

All  who  profess  the  name  of  Christ,  whether 
they  be  regenerated  or  not,  are  in  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven  of  this  age,  occupying  the  arena  in  which 
it  should  have  been  displayed  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  as  the  accepted  King. 

Any  profession  of  Christ,  whether  by  Unitarian, 
Christian  Scientist  or  other  unscriptural  faith,  puts 
that  professor  in  the  kingdom  (puts  him  there  as 
an  imitation  tare;  for,  the  tares  do  not  represent 
hypocrites  or  professors  in  the  Church,  but  coun- 
terfeit systems  of  Christianity  in  the  field  of  the 
world  and  as  such  are  distinctively  called  tares). 

5 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Church  is  neither  the  kingdom  of  Christ  nor 
the  kingdom  of  Heaven  in  this  age. 

The  true  Church  is  a body  of  persons  called  out 
by  the  Gospel  to  faith  in  a crucified  and  risen  Lord, 
made  partakers  of  the  divine  nature  and  joined  to 
Him  as  one  spirit  by  the  indwelling  and  operative 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Ajl  who  are  in  the  Church  are  necessarily  in  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven  because  they  make  a profession 
of  Christ. 

All  who  are  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  of  this  age 
are  not  necessarily  in  the  Church  which  is  the  Body 
of  Christ. 

Only  those  who  have  been  born  twice  are  in  the 
actual  and  true  Church. 

The  door  of  the  Church  is  a sacrificial,  but  risen 
Christ,  and  the  initial  act  of  entrance  is  this  second 
birth  we  call  regeneration  and  is  literally  a begetting 
from  above. 

To  substitute  the  kingdom  of  Christ  for  the 
Church  of  Christ,  or  to  call  the  Church  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  is,  on  the  one  hand,  to  preach  and  teach 
what  does  not  exist  and,  on  the  other,  to  confound 
things  which  differ  and  are  as  far  apart  as  the  east 
is  from  the  west. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  substitutes  the  Gospel 
of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  for  the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of 
God  by  confounding  the  one  with  the  other. 

The  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  the  an- 
nouncement of  the  Coming  of  Christ  as  King,  as  the 


6 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


God  of  the  whole  earth,  and  the  obligation  of  the 
world  to  receive  Him  as  God  and  King. 

The  Gospel  of  grace  is  the  announcement  that 
by  His  sacrificial  death  our  Lord  has  reconciled  a 
rebel  world  to  God,  obtained  a stay  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  divine  judgment  and  on  the  basis  of  the  satis- 
faction rendered  to  the  law,  the  government  and 
being  of  God,  the  God  of  all  righteousness  is  able 
to  deal  in  forgiving  grace  with  the  worst  of  men, 
able  to  be  just  and  yet  justify  the  ungodly,  accept- 
ing the  death  of  the  cross  as  a propitiation  for  the 
nature  of  sin  and  a complete  atonement  for  the  sins 
and  transgressions  of  all  who  shall  claim  it. 

The  Gospel  of  grace  is  the  good  news  that  this 
once  crucified  Christ  risen  from  the  dead  and  now 
seated  in  Heaven  as  the  last  Adam,  the  Second  Man, 
is  able  to  give  new,  spiritual  and  eternal  life  to  men. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is  a socialistic,  edu- 
cational and  ethical  campaign. 

The  Church  of  Christ,  considered  as  such,  is  not 
called  upon  to  labor  in  these  departments  of  ex- 
clusively world  work. 

Utilitarianism  will  furnish  social  reformation  > 
natural  endowment  will  of  itself  call  aloud  for  edu- 
cation, for  self-culture,  and  the  law  of  self-defence 
will  demand  (as  in  the  case  of  prohibition)  a certain 
degree  of  moral  sanitation;  but,  morality,  mere 
ethics  of  the  natural  man  and  the  life  of  a risen 
Christ  in  the  soul  are  as  far  apart  as  earth  is  from 
heaven. 


7 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Inter  church  Movement  seeks  to  save  society 
rather  than  the  individual. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world  to 
save  the  individual.  His  last  act  was  to  snatch  the 
thief  as  “a  brand  from  the  burning.” 

It  is  He  who  has  said  one  soul  is  worth  more  than 
a whole  world. 

The  Son  of  God  lived  in  a society  full  of  con- 
ditions against  which  the  natural  man  revolts  today 
— war,  slavery,  profiteering,  poverty.  He  said  no 
word  against  this  social  condition.  On  the  con- 
trary, He  affirmed  He  came  into  the  world  to  bring 
a sword  and  not  peace,  to  produce  conflict,  not 
harmony.  So  far  from  holding  out  the  hope  that 
He  came  to  set  in  motion  a force  that  should  do 
away  with  poverty  and  abolish  the  inequality  be- 
tween men,  He  announced  that  poverty  and  the 
distinction  of  class  would  continue  during  the  whole 
time  of  His  absence  from  this  world. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  reverses  the  Commis- 
sion of  Christ. 

The  new  world  movement  does  not  wish  to  waste 
time  and  energy  in  plucking  a few  brands  from  the 
burning;  it  would  make  the  individual  necessity 
secondary,  the  community  claims  first. 

The  Church  is  exhorted  to  become  a commu- 
nity center,  interested  in  whatever  may  interest 
the  community,  civic  righteousness,  sanitary  hous- 
ing, pure  food  supply,  healthy  amusements,  the 
legitimate  (?)  drama,  the  question  of  capital  and 


8 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


labor,  political  economy  and  all  humanitarian  de- 
mands. The  Church  is  to  deal  with  the  community 
and  its  moral  and  social  needs  in  block,  rather  than 
spend  capital  and  effort  upon  a few  stray  sheep  out- 
side the  fold.  The  redemption  of  society  is  to  be  the 
great  objective.  The  community  is  to  be  freed 
from  wrong  conditions.  The  Church  is  to  put  down 
secret  as  well  as  open  immorality,  reinforce  the  vice 
squad,  back  up  its  investigations  and  malodorous 
revelations  with  congregational  appeals  for  stricter 
legislation.  The  Church  is  exhorted  to  clean  up 
Sodom  instead  of  coming  out  of  it.  Establish  society 
on  a clean  basis  and  there  will  be,  it  is  said,  no  more 
stray  sheep,  the  rising  generation  will  grow  up  good 
and  tractable  sheep,  finding  their  way  logically  into 
the  Church.  Thus  the  need  of  expensive  revivals 
will  be  at  an  end  and  the  membership  of  the  Church 
will  be  assured  in  a healthy,  legitimate  and  natural 
way. 

The  day  of  soul  saving  is  over. 

The  day  of  society  saving  has  arrived. 

This  is  the  logic  of  the  Interchurch  Movement. 

And  all  this  in  face  of  the  demand  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture that  the  Church  shall  come  out,  be  separate 
from  the  community  and  interested  in  one  supreme 
thing — the  preaching  of  Christ  and  Him  crucified. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  talks  primarily  of  the 
ethical  and  secondarily  and  vaguely  of  the  sacrificial 
Christ. 

Christ  is  set  before  us  as  the  Exemplar  of  right- 
eousness in  the  life  He  lived  on  earth. 


•9 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


I have  failed  so  far,  in  the  literature  of  the  move- 
ment, to  find  any  description  of  the  righteousness 
which  Scripture  declares  He  wrought  by  His  death 
on  the  cross  and  whereby  He  became  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  unto  all  and  upon  all  them  that  believe. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  has  much  to  say  about 
the  Christ  who  lived  on  earth,  but  not  so  much  about 
the  Christ  who  died  on  the  cross. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  speaks  frequently  of 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  but  it  is  the  moral,  rather  than 
the  penal,  sacrifice. 

Throughout  the  literature  of  the  movement  I 
do  not  recall  any  quotation  or  reference  to  the 
terrible  cry  of  the  Son  of  God  in  the  hour  of  His 
agony  on  the  cross,  “My  God,  My  God,  why  hast 
thou  forsaken  me?” 

He  was  actually  forsaken  because,  as  a sacrifice 
for  sin — as  a substitute— He  endured  the  judgment 
of  God  against  sin  on  behalf  of  all  those  who  should 
so  claim  Him. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  speaks  of  the  “ ideals ” 
and  “ principles ” of  Christ. 

Scripture  has  nothing  to  say  about  His  ideals 
and  principles. 

He  did  not  come  to  set  up  ideals  nor  lay  down 
principles. 

He  came  to  make  Himself  the  issue  of  life  and 
death,  of  salvation  or  damnation. 

He  came  to  offer  Himself  as  a ransom  for  sinners 


10 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


and  by  His  resurrection  give  them  His  own  life  and 
nature,  making  them  the  Children  of  God. 

“What  think  ye  of  Christ?”  was  His  question. 

It  is  not  whether  you  copy  His  ideals  or  follow 
His  principles,  but  what  is  your  relation  to  Him? 

Do  you  believe  in  Him  and  accept  Him  for  all 
He  claims  Himself  to  be?— you  are  saved. 

Do  you  live  the  most  moral  life  that  ever  man 
lived  on  earth  and  do  not  accept  Him  for  all  He 
claims,  nor  offer  Him  as  your  sacrifice  for  sin?  then 
you  miss  relation  to  Him  here  and  hereafter  and  are 
lost  forever. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  contends  our  Lord  came 
into  the  world  to  be  an  example  to  men. 

Scripture  teaches  the  Son  of  God  did  not  come 
into  the  world  to  live  as  an  example  at  all. 

He  did  not  come  to  live,  He  came  to  die,  to  lay 
down  His  life  under  the  judgment  of  God  against 
sin. 

He  Himself  said:  “No  man  taketh  it  from  me, 
but  I lay  it  down  of  myself.  I have  power  to  lay 
it  down  and  I have  power  to  take  it  again.  This 
commandment  have  I received  from  my  Father.” 

This  is  what  Paul  means  when  he  says  He  became 
obedient  unto  the  death  of  the  cross. 

Looking  forward  to  His  predetermined  death, 
He  said:  “Father,  save  me  from  this  hour;  but  for 
this  cause  came  I unto  this  hour.” 

To  die  as  a sin-offering,  that  was  His  purpose. 

To  talk  about  unregenerate  man  following  the 
example  of  Christ,  or  holding  out  such  an  objective 


11 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


is  to  expect  the  crawling  worm  to  rise  and  soar 
with  the  eagle,  or  a grain  of  sand  to  measure  itself 
with  Alpine  heights. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is,  to  a great  degree, 
based  on  the  idea  of  evolution  as  applied  to  character. 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  struck  a death  blow  at 
evolution  as  applied  to  character  when  He  said 
that  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh  and  that 
which  is  born  of  the  spirit  is  spirit,  thereby  laying 
down  as  an  unchangeable  law  that  what  was  born 
of  the  flesh  would  always  be  flesh,  never  could 
become  spirit;  and  that  whatever  was  born  of 
spirit  would  always  be  spirit;  that  between  them 
there  was  more  than  a bridgeless  Atlantic  Ocean 
difference. 

Paul  corroborated  the  Lord  when  he  said : 
“The  natural  man  (that  is  the  soulical  man)  receiv- 
eth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  * * * 
neither  can  he  know  them,  because  they  are 
spiritually  discerned . ’ ’ 

He  emphasized  this  dynamically  when  he  said: 
“The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God;  for  it  is 
not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can 
be.” 


The  Inter  church  Movement,  at  times,  uses  the 
language  of  evangelical  Christianity,  but  in  its  teaching 
denies  it. 

In  its  appropriation  of  Gospel  terms,  repetition 
of  the  name  of  Christ,  its  appeals  to  love  Him, 
serve  Him,  to  make  His  teachings  supreme  in  our 


12 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


lives  it  is  in  great  degree  deceptive;  for,  as  already- 
suggested,  when  it  speaks  of  His  sacrifice,  it  means 
His  moral  sacrifice,  His  self-denial  and  not  the  agony 
of  the  cross.  When  we  read  of  regeneration  and 
pursue  it  to  the  end  it  is  not  so  much  regeneration 
of  the  individual  as  the  reformation  and  reorganiza- 
tion of  society.  When  it  speaks  of  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  it  does  not  mean  the  Kingdom  He  is  to  come 
from  Heaven  to  establish,  but  extension  of  the  present 
world-stained,  infidelity -filled,  professing  Church. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  lays  down  as  a funda- 
mental proposition  that  the  work  of  the  Church  is  to 
establish  a civilization  throughout  the  world,  Christian 
in  passion  and  spirit. 

This  civilization  is  to  be  offered  to  the  world  on 
the  basis  of  the  Golden  Rule  and  the  general  and 
ethical  side  of  Christianity. 

This  offer  of  civilization  is  so  stripped  of  doctrine, 
so  denuded  of  definition,  so  applied  on  the  assum- 
tion  that  all  men  are  sons  of  God  and  need  only  to 
develop  the  ethical  characteristic  of  doing  as  one 
would  be  done  by,  that  a fairly  fine  and  ordered 
civilization  springing  up  out  of  merely  natural, 
moral  culture  and  without  any  intelligent  Bible 
comprehension  of  Christ  might  pass  for  Christianity 
itself.  Indeed,  it  is  a common  thing  to  hear  men 
who  do  not  know  Christ  as  the  divine  sacrifice,  as 
the  risen  Man  in  glory,  as  our  great  God  and  Saviour, 
confidently  asserting:  “O,  if  we  practice  the 
Golden  Rule,  we  shall  do  well  enough  here  and  be 
safe  enough  hereafter.” 


13 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  '1  H E 


The  Inter  church  Movement  insists  on  the  obligation 
of  the  Church,  as  a Church,  to  be  occupied  with  the 
interests  of  American  citizenship. 

It  is  true  Paul  recognized  his  individual  obligation 
as  a Roman  citizen,  claimed  its  privileges  and  pro- 
tection, yet,  when  writing  to  the  Church  in  the  very 
place  where  he  first  affirmed  himself  to  be  a Roman, 
he  testified  the  Church,  as  a church,  had  no  work 
nor  responsibility  in  respect  to  earthly  citizenship, 
but  that  as  a corporate  body  its  citizenship  was  in 
Heaven;  nevertheless  as  Christians  they  must  see 
that  their  individual  citizenship  was  in  accord  with 
the  Gospel  of  Christ,  that  it  must  bring  no  reproach 
upon  Him  and  that  as  citizens  they  must  meet  their 
duties  to  the  government  under  which  they  lived. 
The  work  of  the  Church  as  a whole  was  to  shine  as  a 
light  in  the  world  and  hold  forth  the  Word  of  life  to 
men. 

However  much  the  individual  may  stand  for  his 
citizenship  and  use  his  personal  Christian  experience 
to  make  it  better,  the  Church  in  its  corporate  respon- 
sibility is  not  to  engage  in  civic  work  and  righteous- 
ness. The  moment  the  Church,  as  the  spiritual 
Body  of  Christ,  attempts  that  it  is  met  with  the 
rebuke  of  the  Son  of  God:  “Ye  are  not  of  the 
world.” 

The  Inter  church  Movement  does  not  preach  doc- 
trine, it  ignores  it,  and  gives  homilies  and  moral 
appeals. 

Paul  has  a different  concept. 

He  writes  to  Timothy:  “Till  I come,  give 


14 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


attendance  to  reading,  to  exhortation,  to 
doctrine .” 

Again  he  says:  “Take  heed  to  thyself,  and  unto 
the  doctrine ” 

He  bids  Timothy  hold  fast  the  “form  of  sound 
doctrine." 

Doctrine  to  Christianity  is  what  the  backbone 
is  to  the  body. 

Christianity  without  doctrine  is  a boneless 
system. 

It  is  a meaningless,  apparently  well-intentioned, 
good  thing  without  form,  force,  conviction  or  power. 

It  is  something  startling  that  in  giving  the  marks 
of  the  time  when  the  Church  would  depart  from  the 
faith,  Paul  should  declare  it  would  be  when  the 
Church  should  depart  from  sound  doctrine. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is  enthusiastically 
supported  by  all  preachers,  teachers  and  theological 
seminary  professors  who  do  not  accept  a whole 
Bible,  socialistic  reformers  and  all  who  reject  the 
Second  Coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

This,  of  itself,  ought  to  be  sufficient  indictment 
and  ought  to  separate  from  it  all  those  who  accept 
Paul’s  admonition  to  wait  for  the  Son  of  God  from 
Heaven. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  draws  special  attention 
to  Jesus  as  a Teacher,  and  talks  much  of  His  teachings. 

This  was  the  blunder  made  by  Nicodemus. 

He  came  to  Jesus  by  night,  calling  Him  a teacher 
sent  from  God,  and  seeking  from  Him  a new 
doctrine. 


15 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


Our  Lord  gave  him  a rebuke  that  ought  to  be 
far-reaching  enough  to  meet  the  attitude  of  the 
Interchurch  Movement  today. 

He  made  it  clear  what  Nicodemus  needed  was 
not  a new  doctrine  but  a new  life;  and  that  He 
Himself  was  something  more  than  a teacher,  He 
was  the  Giver  of  this  needed  new  life. 

It  is  not  new  doctrine  men  need,  but  new  and 
eternal  life. 

They  need  it  in  New  York.  They  need  it  in  Africa 
and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth.  They  are  to 
get  it  as  the  Lord  announced  to  Nicodemus  through 
faith  in  a Christ  lifted  up  as  Moses  lifted  up  the 
serpent  in  the  wilderness,  faith  in  Christ  as  the 
crucified  substitute  under  the  judgment  of  God 
against  sin  and  yet  as  the  unfailing  pledge  of  His 
infinite  love  to  a perishing  world. 

When  the  Christian  minister  is  faithful  to  his 
commission  he  will  invite  men  to  Jesus,  not  as  a 
teacher,  but  as  the  once  crucified  but  now  risen 
Lord  and  Life-Giver. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  exhorts  the  Church  to 
unite  with  the  world  and  its  best  moral  and  govern- 
mental agencies  in  making  it  a better  and  more  com- 
fortable place  to  live  in. 

The  Son  of  God  taught  that  a world  spiritually 
dead  must  attend  to  the  things  of  a spiritually  dead 
world.  He  said,  “Let  the  dead  bury  their  dead: 
but  go  thou  and  preach  the  kingdom  of  God;” 
not  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  but  God;  in  other  words, 
induct  men  into  that  spiritual  relation  with  God 


16 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


which  is  not  meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness  and 
peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  exhorts  the  churches  to 
organize  themselves  into  family  groups  under  individual 
leaders  with  a final  cabinet  over  which  the  Pastor  shall 
be  head. 

This  is  simply  an  exhortation  to  the  Church  to 
multiply  wheels  within  wheels,  to  extend  the  system 
of  internal  and  humanly  invented  organizations  by 
which  the  assembly  of  Christ  on  its  original  lines 
has  in  some  cases  almost  been  organized  out  of 
existence. 

It  is  creating,  on  the  one  side,  an  ecclesiastical 
sovietism,  and,  on  the  other,  a concentrated  dicta- 
torship, a determinator  of  policy  against  which  indi- 
vidualism must  find  itself  helpless  and  reduced  to 
the  level  of  a recalcitrant. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  has  little  to  say  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  through  the  redemption  by 
blood. 

I do  not  recall  reading  any  pronounced  repe- 
tition of  the  apostolic  statement,  “without  shedding 
of  blood  is  no  remission.” 

It  may  be  that  back  of  this  movement  there  is  a 
desire  to  convict  men  of  sin,  lead  them  to  repentance 
and  give  them  assurance  of  absolution  in  the  fact 
that  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  God’s  Son,  cleanseth 
from  all  sin,  but  it  does  not  appear  prominent  in  the 
literature  of  the  Interchurch  Movement. 


17 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Inter  church  Movement  is  taken  up  with  the 
life  that  now  is  and  not  with  the  life  that  is  to  come. 

The  miseries  and  woes  of  this  life  are  so  great, 
the  confusion  and  conflict  so  widespread  and  the 
Interchurch  Movement  is  so  conscious  of  it  all  that 
it  seems  to  have  no  time  to  speak  of  Heaven  and 
appears  to  have  forgotten  there  is  a Hell. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  sounds  no  warning  to 
the  souls  of  men  concerning  the  woe  of  eternal  punish- 
ment. 

The  second  death  of  which  the  Son  of  God 
speaks  so  terrifically,  warning  men  that  it  would  be 
better  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  God  with  one  eye 
and  one  foot,  than  having  both  to  be  cast  into  the 
quenchless  fire  and  suffer  the  gnawing  of  the  death- 
less worm,  does  not  appear  in  Interchurch  liter- 
ature. 

The  truth  is,  as  already  stated,  the  Interchurch 
Movement  is  too  busy  with  the  things  of  time  to 
think  of  eternity;  too  much  occupied  in  righting  the 
wrongs  of  this  world  to  prepare  men  for  that  which  is 
to  come.  To  this  modern  movement  Heaven  is  al- 
together beyond  the  field  of  the  strongest  telescope, 
entirely  beyond  the  measurement  of  the  surveyor’s 
chain,  shut  out  by  intervening  distances  so  great 
there  is  neither  count  of  miles  nor  analysis  of 
kilometres.  This  world  with  its  multiplying  prob- 
lems, its  laughter  drowned  in  tears,  its  crowding 
materialism  and  the  noise  of  riot  occupy  the  new 
movement,  holding  it  to  the  level  of  the  days  that 
are  and  not  to  those  that  are  to  come. 


18 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


It  will  spend  millions  to  save  men  from  the 
swiftly  speeding  now,  but  is  miserly  about  wasting 
it  to  save  men  from  the  equally  swift  coming  here- 
after. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  seeks  to  build  a new 
world  in  which  peace  and  righteousness  shall  per- 
manently prevail  and  over  which  Christ  shall  reign  as 
spiritual,  invisible  and  always-absent  King. 

The  endeavor  to  set  up  a kingdom  in  which  Christ 
the  Lord  shall  be  a spiritual,  but  never  a returning, 
visible  presence  is  a scheme  fertilized  by  the  imagin- 
ation of  men  and  without  a single  foundation  in 
Holy  Scripture — a dream,  but  as  unsubstantial  as  a 
dream — as  deceiving  as  the  mirage  of  a desert  that 
builds  golden  cities  and  refreshing  oases  against  the 
far-off  sky,  melting  into  thinnest  air  while  the  weary 
and  famishing  traveler  regards  them. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  is  deceptive  in  that  it 
preaches,  not  a complete,  but  a partial  Christ. 

Nothing  can  better  illustrate  this  than  the 
appeal  made  in  one  of  the  circulars  to  the  Christian 
minister  to  take  the  initiative  with  other  denomina- 
tions in  his  community  for  cooperative  evangelistic 
work,  assuring  him  that  the  passion  of  Christ 
should  dominate  every  plan — and  by  the  passion  of 
Christ  is  not  meant  the  death  of  Christ,  but  his 
intense  enthusiasm  while  in  this  world. 

The  appeal  of  the  circular  approaches  almost  the 
region  of  hysteria. 


19 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  text  from  which  it  takes  its  inspiration  is 
this:  “He  poured  out  his  soul.” 

The  pouring  out  of  His  soul  is  defined  as  the 
intensity  with  which  He  poured  it  into  His  disciples. 
He  “invested,”  it  is  said,  “every  particle  of  brain  and 
blood  in  them,”  pushing  them  forward  with  His 
earnestness  and  enthusiasm  to  redeem  the  world. 

Just  as  He  poured  out  His  soul  by  pouring  His 
intensity  into  His  disciples,  the  minister  is  to  pour 
his  soul  into  his  Church.  He  is  to  stir  them  by  the 
communication  of  his  soul  intensity  and  enthusiasm 
and  thus  lead  them  to  give  themselves  to  Christ. 

But  I insist  on  knowing  what  kind  of  a Christ. 

It  may  be  said  all  this  is  taken  for  granted. 
It  is  taken  for  granted  that  everyone  knows. 

We  have  no  right  to  take  it  for  granted.  Nor, 
indeed,  would  the  average  person  know  what  the 
text  quoted  above  signifies  beyond  the  explanation 
given  as  expressing  the  earthly  enthusiasm  of  the 
Lord;  nor  would  the  average  person  with  the  text  in 
that  form  go  beyond  the  idea  of  an  earthly  Christ. 

The  original  text  is  cut  in  two. 

The  entire  Scripture  reads:  “He  hath  poured 
out  his  soul  unto  death:  and  he  was  numbered  with 
the  transgressors;  and  he  bare  the  sin  of  many  and 
made  intercession  for  the  transgressors.” 

Pouring  out  His  soul  unto  death  is  something  quite 
different  from  pouring  His  soul  into  His  disciples 
and  being  “glorified  through  the  group  into  whom 
he  poured  his  soul.” 

Pouring  His  soul  into  His  disciples  as  the  thought 
of  the  text  is  a sad  travesty,  not  to  say  perversion, 


20 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


of  Holy  Scripture,  a tremendous  shutting  out  of  the 
protoevangelium  proclaimed  by  the  fifty-third 
chapter  of  Isaiah. 

According  to  that  Scripture  our  Lord  poured  out 
His  soul  to  death. 

And  how? 

In  the  one  way  in  which  Scripture  ever  speaks 
of  it,  by  shedding  His  blood,  sacrificing  Himself. 

We  are  not  left  in  any  doubt  about  it. 

He  was  numbered  with  the  transgressors. 

Not  only  was  He  hung  up  between  the  thieves 
and  so  numbered  with  them,  but  as  the  Apostle  tells 
us — “He  was  made  sin  for  us;”  and  being  so  made, 
so  treated  of  God,  was  Himself  counted  as  a trans- 
gressor, looked  upon  of  God  as  the  criminal  of  the 
universe. 

Isaiah  says  He  bare  the  sin  of  many. 

He  made  intercession  for  the  transgressors. 

It  is  true  He  interceded  for  His  enemies.  He 
prayed  for  them  while  on  the  cross;  but  His  inter- 
cession goes  beyond  that. 

He  intercedes  now. 

And  where? 

In  Heaven. 

On  what  ground? 

On  the  ground  that  “He  bare  their  sins  in  His 
own  body  on  the  tree;”  and  is  now  their  high  priest 
within  the  upper  vail. 

We  are  to  preach  Christ.  We  are  to  preach  Him 
with  a burning,  unfailing  enthusiasm. 

But  it  is  to  be  the  Christ  Paul  preached. 

A crucified  Christ,  a sacrificial  and  a risen  Christ, 


21 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


the  only  Saviour  of  men  and  the  only  way  in  which 
He  can  save  them. 

Let  the  minister  get  a burden  of  souls.  Let  him 
cry  out  for  them  and  crave  them  as  sincerely  as  Paul 
did  when  He  was  willing  for  the  sake  of  his  brethren 
if  needs  be  to  be  accursed  from  Christ  that  he  might 
save  some;  but  let  there  be  no  question  about  the 
kind  of  Christ  that  is  preached.  And  if  it  be  the 
“passion  of  the  cross,”  let  it  be  the  cross  as  an  altar 
on  which  God  the  Father  gave  His  Son  to  be  the 
sacrificial  Lamb  ordained  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world;  let  the  “passion”  be  the  sacrificial  suffer- 
ing of  Him  who  was  in  truth  the  sin-bearing  Lamb 
of  God. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  is  organized  for  the 
might  of  money.  It  dictates  budgets  for  churches  and 
invents  worldly  methods  to  raise  them. 

All  the  method  and  manner  of  war  drives;  all 
the  noise,  publicity  effort  and  insistence  of  those 
world  efforts  are  used  to  create  enthusiasm  and  stir 
up  the  contagion  and  rivalry  of  contribution  till  the 
sums  of  money  are  figured  in  hundreds  of  millions  of 
dollars. 

HJ;  However  the  ultimate  of  moral  benefit  may  be 
urged,  the  money  thought  and  the  money  idea,  the 
immensity  of  the  aggregate,  the  assurance  what  it 
will  do,  the  feeling  that  it  guarantees  power  and 
victory  for  the  Church  fill  the  air  and  dominate  the 
mind. 

The  Scriptural  method,  be  it  more  or  less,  is  the 
voluntary  offering,  the  dictation  and  direction  of  the 


22 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


Holy  Spirit  and  the  firm  conviction  that  spiritual 
success  is  attained  neither  by  might  nor  by  power;' 
neither  by  the  wealth  of  a few  over-rich,  nor  the 
syndicalized  wealth  of  the  many,  but  by  the  Spirit 
Himself  dwelling  in  the  individual  and  pervading  the 
assembly. 

The  conglomeration  of  money  through  headline 
pleas  and  whole-page  advertisements  in  the  daily 
press  may  not  be  as  it  has  been  charged  a species  of 
“wildcat  financiering,”  but  it  is  leading  the  pro- 
fessing Church  from  the  ground  of  dependence  on 
God  to  a dangerous  degree  of  dependence  on  money, 
feeling  that  in  it  is  to  be  found  the  “hiding  of  power.” 

The  deductions  I have  thus  far  made  concerning 
the  Interchurch  Movement  and  the  formulation  of 
reasons  against  it  are  not  the  results  of  mere  imagina- 
tion nor  personal  prejudice,  but  are  drawn  from 
statements  made  in  the  literature  of  the  movement 
itself.  I will  cite  a few  of  them  and  in  doing  so  will 
necessarily  repeat  some  of  the  deductions  already 
made  but  with  fuller  analysis. 

In  the  Interchurch  literature  much  is  said  about 
the  condition  of  America  and  the  obligation  of  the 
Church  in  respect  to  it. 

Many  of  the  generalizations  made  are  true  when 
measured  from  the  basis  of  political  economy  and 
belong  to  the  realm  of  the  world,  the  powers  that 
govern  it,  but  not  to  the  Church  of  Christ  called  to 
walk  in  separation  from  world  rulership  and  policy. 

The  Church  is  neither  on  the  throne  nor  in  the 
presidential  chair;  and  however  individually  Christ- 


23 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


ians  may  be  there  and  personally  using  Christian 
influence,  the  Church,  as  a Church,  has  no  corporate 
part  in  it.  The  very  word  “Church”  signifies  “the 
called  out  ones,”  called  out  and  separated  from 
world  ways  and  principles.  The  divine  Spirit 
commands  the  Church  not  to  be  yoked  together  with 
unbelievers.  He  commands  all  who  would  be  faith- 
ful to  the  true  place  of  the  Church  to  “come  out,  be 
separate,  and  touch  not  the  unclean  thing.” 

Our  Lord  Himself  has  said  to  the  Church: 
“Ye  are  not  of  the  world.  * * * I have  chosen 

you  out  of  the  world.”  That  is  separating  them  and 
making  them  distinct  from  the  world,  from  that 
system  wherein  the  three  operative  forces  are,  “the 
lust  of  the  flesh,  the  lust  of  the  eyes  and  the  pride 
of  life;”  where  self  and  not  God  is  the  enthroned  and 
all-directing  principle. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  asks:  “Shall  the 
Church  emphasize  minor  differences ?” 

Minor  differences  are  the  expression  of  original 
convictions. 

If  these  convictions  or  differences  have  no  Scrip- 
tural foundation  they  are  worse  than  minor,  they  are 
false.  If  they  are  true,  then  those  who  profess  them 
must  stand  for  them  or  be  guilty  of  professing  what 
they  no  longer  believe. 

Not  to  believe  what  is  professed  is  deceptive,  it  is 
actually  lying. 

Not  to  stand  fully  by  what  is  believed  is  arrant 
cowardice. 

To  make  a compromise  for  the  sake  of  peace  or 


24 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


position  is  to  be  a traitor  to  the  truth  and  guilty  of 
high  treason  against  God — a blind  leader  of  the 
blind  and  too  despicable  even  for  contempt. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  tells  us  that  “the 
problems  of  society,  national  and  international,  are 
solved  by  the  Golden  Rule  intelligently  applied.  ” 

Nothing  would  seem  more  basic  than  that  state- 
ment. It  is  so  affirmatively  made.  It  carries  with 
it  such  an  atmosphere  of  profound  self-satisfaction, 
such  finality,  that  you  seem  to  feel  the  solution  al- 
ready attained,  all  warring  interests  settled  and  peace 
speaking  in  harmonious  phrase.  And  yet  rudely 
iconoclastic  as  it  may  sound  to  say  it,  it  is  nevertheless 
true  that  nothing  could  be  more  absurdly  false. 

These  problems,  national  and  international,  can 
be  solved  only  when  all  men  shall  know  the  Lord 
from  the  least  to  the  greatest.  According  to  Holy 
Scripture,  that  will  be  only  when  the  Lord  Himself 
shall  have  returned  as  the  King  of  righteousness, 
“the  God  of  the  whole  earth.” 

Not  when  the  Golden  Rule  is  applied  by  natural 
men  will  the  world  learn  righteousness  and  act  in 
brotherly  fashion  one  toward  another.  On  the  con- 
trary, it  is  written,  “when  thy  judgments  are  in  the 
earth,  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  will  learn  right- 
eousness.” 

Not  till  He  comes  as  the  Prince  of  peace  to  rule 
with  a rod  of  iron  will  evil  authority  be  overthrown. 
Not  till  He  returns  and  with  the  touch  of  His  power 
transforms  the  nature  of  men  will  the  Golden  Rule 
be  intelligently  applied. 


25 


W H \ I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Golden  Rule  set  up  on  the  basis  of  an  unre- 
generate world  would  be  as  a building  of  gold  on  a 
foundation  of  shifting  sand. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  says:  “ Another  great 
duty  of  the  Church  in  this  hour  is  the  promotion  of 
education  * * * with  Christian  ideals.” 

The  Church  is  not  here  to  educate  men  in  the 
wisdom,  knowledge  and  science  of  the  world,  seeking 
to  get  into  this  teaching  the  flavor  of  Christian 
sentiment  and  ideals. 

The  folly  of  any  such  proposition  ought  to  be 
self-evident. 

How  can  the  Church  attempt  a scheme  of  educa- 
tion that  confronts  it  in  textbook  and  teaching  ap- 
paratus with  the  principal  of  evolution,  of  uniformi- 
tarianism,  the  logical  denial  of  an  original,  personal 
causation? 

How  can  the  Church  teach  evolution  and  be 
true  to  the  declaration  of  Holy  Scripture  that  the 
natural  man,  however  much  he  may  accept  teaching 
on  science  and  philosophy,  cannot  receive  the  things 
of  the  Spirit  of  God? 

The  Christian  teachers  may  go  along  smoothly 
enough  with  the  outlines  of  general  education;  but, 
at  what  point  in  history  can  they  introduce  the 
Virgin  Birth?  At  what  point  in  biology  can  they 
set  forth  Lazarus,  dead,  with  broken-down  tissue, 
corrupt,  putrefying  and  coming  to  life  again?  And 
when  they  are  teaching  the  law  of  gravitation  and 
control  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  at  what  point  can 
they  introduce  seriously  the  doctrine  that  Jesus 


26 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


ascended  in  His  human  body  and  passed  across 
undetermined  spaces  to  some  particular  location 
where  distance  from  the  earth  is  to  be  measured,  not 
by  miles,  but  years  as  light  travels? 

Will  they  go  on  and  teach  that  which  in  the 
curriculae  of  the  schools  is  dead  set  against  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity;  and  then 
skipping  all  doctrinal  statements  contrary  to  the 
standards  and  pronouncements  of  science,  com- 
promise and  give  the  scholars  the  ethical  side  of 
Christianity,  that  ethical  side  which  is  not  worth  a 
picayune  unless  Jesus  Christ  was  Virgin  born,  rose 
from  the  dead  in  the  body  in  which  He  died,  as- 
cended to  Heaven  and  now  sits  omnipotent  God  and 
immortal  man  on  the  throne  of  the  universe? 

Education  promoted  by  Christian  ideals  means 
compromise  on  the  truth  of  God’s  Word,  and  the 
presentation  of  a Christ  shorn  of  every  claim  that 
should  lead  us  to  fall  down  and  adore  Him. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  lays  down  as  a funda- 
mental principle  that,  “The  mission  of  the  Church  is 
to  establish  a civilization,  Christian  in  spirit  and 
passion  throughout  the  world.” 

Such  a commission  was  never  given  by  the  Son 
of  God. 

Such  a proposition  is  a denial  of  the  commission. 

No  warrant  for  it  can  be  found  in  Holy  Scripture. 

The  Church  is  not  here  to  establish  civilization, 
but  to  save  the  souls  of  men  individually,  not  merely 
from  moral  wreck  and  ruin  in  time,  but  disfellowship 
with  and  separation  from  God  hereafter. 


27 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


What  avail  will  the  best  civilization  be  to  any 
soul  which  goes  out  of  this  life  into  eternity  without 
a passport  signed  and  sealed  in  the  sacrificial  blood 
of  Christ? 

To  establish  civilization  means  to  take  part  with 
the  world  in  its  social  and  governmental  business; 
but  we  are  expressly  told  that  in  this  age  God  is 
visiting  the  Gentiles  to  take  out  of  them  a people 
for  His  name;  that  this  is  not  the  age  in  which  the 
Church  is  to  be  a co-partner  with  the  world  in  any 
degree,  but  the  age  in  which  it  is  to  be  “taken  out;” 
and  that  this  age  is  to  be  characteristically  the  age 
of  the  “taking  out.” 

The  Apostle  James  exhorts  Christians  to  be  separ- 
ated from  the  world  as  a system.  He  says  the  friend- 
ship of  the  world  is  enmity  with  God,  and  that 
whosoever  will  be  a friend  of  the  world  is  an  enemy 
of  God. 

It  is  not  the  work  of  the  Church  to  better  the 
world,  but  to  condemn  it,  even  as  Noah  did  in  the 
building  of  the  ark.  Every  Church  true  to  its 
calling  and  mission  should  stand  as  a condemnation 
to  the  world  that  enthrones  self  and  not  God  as  its 
prime  principle  and  directing  force. 

The  Church  is  not  here  to  deceive  men  with  the 
cry  of  peace  when  there  is  no  peace.  It  is  not  here 
to  sing  the  Lorelei  song  that  the  world  is  moving 
on  to  better  and  happier  days.  It  is  not  here  in  the 
midst  of  industrial  peril,  political  confusion,  growing 
lawlessness  and  the  agonizing  endeavor  of  men  to 
stabilize  a society  shivering  more  and  more  under  its 
inability  to  hold  together,  the  true  Church  is  not 


28 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


here  to  lull  men  to  sleep  but  to  warn  of  a judgment 
to  come  that  will  sweep  away  the  best  civilization 
man  can  establish  even  with  the  aid  of  a professing 
Church  subsidized  by  the  world. 

The  Church  is  here  to  keep  open  door,  bidding 
men  to  enter  through  Christ  who  is  the  door,  and  flee 
out  of  a world  hastening  to  its  fixed  and  judicial 
doom. 

Salvation,  not  civilization — that  is  the  work  of 
the  Church,  and  the  only  work  given  of  God,  sal- 
vation from  this  world  as  well  as  the  woe  to  come, 
even  as  it  is  written:  “Who  gave  himself  for  our 
sins,  that  he  might  deliver  us  from  this  present  evil 
world  (age).” 

The  Church  must  either  recognize  this  system, 
called  the  world,  to  be  a splendid  ship,  moving 
steadily  out  of  the  region  of  storm  and  stress  to  the 
port  of  better  days  and  the  haven  of  unruffled  peace, 
giving  each  day  fresh  opportunity  to  the  decorators 
to  paint  and  gild,  to  the  sanitary  engineers  to  cleanse 
and  purify,  each  day  affirming  that  it  is  better 
farther  on;  or,  the  Church  must  awake  to  the  fact 
that  the  world,  like  the  ship,  is  already  on  the 
breakers;  that  each  succeeding  and  tempestuous 
wave  is  settling  the  groaning  system  deeper  in  the 
tide  of  lawlessness,  anarchy,  confusion,  revolt,  woe, 
misery  and  death;  and  that  the  real  and  practical 
work  of  the  Church  is  to  be  like  that  of  the  men  of 
the  life-saving  station,  to  put  out  in  face  of  the  storm 
and  stress  and  get  the  imperilled  cr ew  and  the 
seemingly  dazed  and  stupefied  company  to  the  shore 
of  safety.  To  talk  of  better  days  and  a purified 


29 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


world  while  the  Son  of  God  is  away  is  to  speak 
softly,  teach  falsely  and  treacherously  deny  all  He 
and  His  apostles  have  so  warningly  said  of  the  end 
of  the  age. 

The  concrete  meaning  of  Bible  Christianity  is  a 
protest  against  the  best  as  well  as  the  worst  in  the 
natural  man.  It  is  a protest  against  the  best  char- 
acter he  can  live,  a protest  against  the  finest  civiliza- 
tion he  can  establish. 

The  Church  is  under  bonds  not  to  talk  about 
civilization,  but  salvation,  not  salvation  of  society, 
but  the  individual;  under  bonds  to  proclaim  a new 
life  from  a risen  Christ  as  the  only  hope  for  man  in 
this  hour  and  warn  the  world  in  no  uncertain  terms 
that  civilization  in  its  most  moral  and  exalted  form 
will  be  swept  away  by  the  Son  of  God  when  He  comes 
the  second  time;  that  He  is  coming,  not  to  establish 
a civilization  Christian  in  spirit,  but  a divine  re- 
genesis of  the  world  where  self  will  be  denied  and  God 
wholly  enthroned  in  every  human  soul. 

In  laying  down,  therefore,  as  a fundamental 
proposition  that  the  work  of  the  Church  in  this  age 
is  to  establish  a civilization  and  call  it  Christian,  the 
Interchurch  Movement  is  putting  itself  on  record  as 
against  the  commission  of  Christ  and  seeking  to  save 
that  which  God  has  judged,  condemned  and  will 
overwhelmingly  destroy. 

In  a booklet,  “ The  New  World  Movement,”  sent 
forth  by  The  Northern  Baptist  Convention,  I find  this 
startling  proposition:  “ The  mission  of  the  Church  is 
not  merely  to  pluck  a few  brands  from  the  burning, 


30 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


but  to  establish  a civilization  that  is  Christian  in  spirit 
and  passion  the  world  around” 

This,  of  course,  is  a repetition  with  amplification 
of  the  proposition  already  discussed  concerning 
civilization,  but  it  calls  for  a reiteration  with  ampli- 
fication of  the  protest  against  it. 

The  Church  is  not  here  to  mend  society,  estab- 
lish good  government  and  make  the  world  a decent, 
safe  and  comfortable  place  to  live  in.  It  is  not 
the  work  of  the  Church  to  make  the  natural  man 
a better  man  naturally  to  live  in  the  world;  nor  to 
make  the  world  a better  world  for  the  natural  man 
to  live  in. 

The  Church  is  here  for  one  supreme  purpose, 
and  that  is  “ to  pluck  brands  from  the  burning” — 
not  a few,  but  many.  It  is  here  to  pluck  the  souls 
of  men,  lay  hold  of  them,  snatch  them  out  and  away 
from  all  danger  of  the  burning;  and  they  are  to  be 
plucked  out  individually,  one  at  a time,  and  not 
otherwise. 

Whatever  may  be  the  beneficent  results  to 
society  and  government  as  by-products  of  the  ex- 
pansion of  a genuine  Christianity,  the  initiative  of 
Christian  action  and  the  one  compelling  motive  must 
be  to  get  the  individual  soul  into  an  eternal  life  union 
with  a once  crucified,  but  now  risen  Christ  and 
Lord. 

The  Son  of  God,  as  already  affirmed,  has  given 
emphasis  to  the  value  of  individual  life  in  saying  a 
whole  world  gained  will  not  compensate  for  a soul 
lost. 


31 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


‘ ‘ Christian’  ’ civilization ! 

The  name  is  a misnomer. 

There  is  no  such  thing  today  on  the  face  of  the 
earth. 

There  never  has  been  and  never  will  be  a civiliza- 
tion Christ  filled  and  owned  of  God  as  such. 

To  call  any  nation  today  a Christian  nation  with 
the  sky  covered  with  war  aeroplanes,  the  sea 
filled  with  battleships,  the  land  echoing  with  the 
tread  of  armed  men,  public  and  private  greed  every- 
where and  the  professing  Church  in  the  midst  dazed 
and  smitten  with  the  leprosy  of  apostasy,  is  to  juggle 
with  words  and  criminally  hide  the  truth. 

Civilization  at  its  best,  however  much  it  may 
have  a head  of  gold,  will  always  have  its  feet  of  clay. 

Civilization  and  Christianity  are  irrevocably 
apart. 

The  disaster  is  that  the  professing  Church  as  a 
whole  and  the  Interchurch  Movement  in  particular 
are  deceiving  men  into  the  belief  that  civilization 
and  genuine  Christianity  are  identical.  So  long  as 
we  have  teachers  who  hold  that  all  men  are  the  sons 
of  God  by  nature,  needing  only  to  follow  the  example 
of  an  ethical  Christ  as  He  lived  on  earth,  get  vision 
of  His  moral  and  humanitarian  ideals  to  develop 
that  innate  sonship;  so  long  as  we  have  teachers 
who  hold  God’s  Christ  to  be  nothing  more  than  a 
social  reformer  appealing  by  the  Golden  Rule  to 
the  resident  good  in  men,  we  shall  continue  to  hear 
about  the  moral  betterment  of  the  world  under  the 
impulse  of  Christian  (?)  civilization  and  behold  in- 
creasing surrender  to  its  insidious  appeals. 


32 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


The  Committee  on  Survey  of  the  Northern  Baptist 
Convention  recommends  “ The  development  of  educa- 
tion work  in  the  Orient  during  the  next  five  years.” 

The  Apostle  Paul,  so  far  as  the  record  goes,  did  not 
seek  to  establish  schools  either  in  Corinth  or  Ephesus. 

The  one  place  from  which  he  was  repudiated 
and  the  city  in  which  in  spite  of  his  fine  sermon  he 
never  established  a Church,  was  Athens,  the  univer- 
sity center  of  Greece,  the  national  marrow  of  phil- 
osophy, learning  and  culture. 

In  writing  to  the  Corinthian  Church  Paul  says 
some  very  marked  things  about  the  inability  of 
human  wisdom  to  know  God,  the  failure  of  human 
culture  to  attain  unto  Him  and  the  facility  of  edu- 
cated man  to  miss  the  truth  about  Him. 

Paul  refused,  capable  as  he  was,  to  preach  with 
enticing  words  of  man’s  wisdom.  He  was  not  willing 
faith  should  stand  in  nor  in  any  way  be  supported 
by  the  wisdom  of  men.  He  determined  not  to  know 
anything  among  them  save  Jesus  Christ  and  Him 
crucified.  Where  he  stood  when  he  preached  he 
could  see  Parnassus,  Helicon  and  the  Castalian 
spring.  Every  mount,  promontory,  vale  and  in- 
dented shore  breathed  out  its  classic  story.  He 
knew  them  all.  The  scholars  of  the  gymnasium 
as  well  as  the  denizens  of  the  purlieus  gathered  to 
hear  him,  and  although  he  might  have  larded  his 
speech  with  Grecian  philosophy,  quotations  from 
the  Greek  poets,  touches  of  classic  grace  and  rounded 
periods;  although  he  was  a man  of  three  languages, 
a cultured  adept  in  the  use  of  words,  he  spoke  so 


33 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


simply  and  in  such  short,  abrupt  syllables  that  many 
of  his  hearers  in  sneering  accents  said  his  speech  was 
“contemptible;”  that  is,  literally,  “of  no  account.” 

Such  a man  with  such  a method  could  feel  no 
call  to  establish  schools,  and  while  teaching  the 
knowledge  and  science  of  the  times  endeavor  to 
permeate  them  with  Christian  ideals. 

We  have  no  record  of  schools  established  in 
Ephesus;  but  we  do  hear  that  his  testimony  made 
the  trade  in  the  silver  souvenir  images  of  the  goddess 
Diana  profitless  and  caused  the  whole  province  of 
Asia  to  turn  away  from  the  worship  of  idols. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  tells  us  Christ  was  the 
Great  Physician  and  believed  part  of  His  mission  was 
to  relieve  human  suffering. 

Perhaps  no  more  radical  blunder  in  teaching  was 
ever  made  than  this. 

The  mission  of  Christ  was  not  objectively  to 
relieve  human  suffering. 

His  miracles  were  purely  incidental. 

They  were  wrought  as  credentials  that  He  was 
what  He  claimed  to  be,  the  annointed  and  covenant 
King  of  the  Jews. 

When  John  the  Baptist  sent  to  inquire  whether 
He  was  the  “Coming  One,”  or  whether  they  should 
look  for  another,  He  at  once  reported  Himself 
through  His  works,  bidding  the  messengers  go  back 
and  tell  John  what  they  saw:  how  at  His  Word  the 
blind  were  receiving  their  sight,  the  lame  walking, 
the  deaf  hearing,  the  lepers  being  cleansed  and  the 
dead  raised  to  life  again. 


34 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


All  this  John  knew  had  been  foretold  of  the  true 
Messiah  and  such,  therefore,  He  must  be. 

The  mission  of  the  Christ  was  not  to  heal  the 
physically  sick,  save  only  as  He  went  to  the  core  of 
their  sickness,  delivered  them  from  the  sin  coinci- 
dent with  it  and  the  power  of  that  Devil  who  had 
inspired  the  one  and  wrought  the  other.  His  mission 
was  to  die  on  the  cross  as  a sacrifice  for  sin,  by  His 
death  destroy  him  who  had  the  power  of  death,  that 
is  the  Devil,  and  become  in  resurrection  the  giver  of 
new  and  eternal  life  which  in  itself  should  be  the 
prophecy  of  a perfect  and  immortal  body. 

The  Inter  church  Movement  is  a concerted,  purpose 
to  support  modernist  theological  seminaries. 

If  these  institutions  are  of  the  sort  that  of  old 
time  were  to  be  found  in  the  city  of  Jericho,  where 
the  faculty  were  unwilling  to  believe  even  though  it 
was  reported  by  Elisha  that  Elijah  had  ascended 
alive  in  his  body  into  Heaven,  and  suggested  to  the 
now  unnerved  Elisha  that  he  should  go  out  and 
hunt  among  the  rocks  and  no  doubt  would  find  the 
body  of  his  master — fallen,  bruised,  mangled,  dead 
— there;  if  the  advanced  teaching  in  the  advanced 
seminaries  of  today  balk  at  the  idea  that  Jesus  rose 
from  the  dead  in  the  body  in  which  He  died,  as- 
cended to  Heaven  as  “this  same  Jesus,”  and  in  that 
stigmatized,  nail  and  spear-pierced  body  sits  on  the 
eternal  throne;  if  these  modern  Jericho  seminaries 
with  their  Jericho  faculties  and  Jericho  theology  do  not 
believe  in  a whole  Bible;  if  these  seminaries  are 
becoming  more  and  more  the  clearing  houses  of 


35 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


infidelity — why  should  we  give  money  to  support 
them?  It  does  not  require  a theological  course  to 
make  us  doubters,  nor  full-fledged  unbelievers,  we 
all  have  that  gift  and  that  drift  by  nature;  we  do 
not  need  higher,  lower,  criticism,  positivism  or 
rationalism  of  any  sort  to  develop  such  conditions 
already  in  us. 

Not  one  dollar  ought  to  be  given  to  any  school 
or  any  system  of  teaching  which  puts  a question 
mark  over  against  the  Virgin  Birth,  draws  a bar 
sinister  over  the  name  and  fame  of  the  Mother  of 
Christ,  sets  Him  as  a bastard  before  men,  an  illegiti- 
mate who  had  no  right  to  be  born  and  robs  Him  of 
His  resurrection  triumph. 

Nay!  with  fervent  heart  we  should  pray  God  to 
render  nugatory  and  destroy  the  evil  efficiency  of 
all  such  institutions  and  raise  up  colleges,  religious 
institutions,  that  will  make  a whole  Bible  the  basis 
of  their  curriculae,  standing  in  unbroken  faith  for  it 
as  fully  inspired  of  God. 

In  the  book  entitled,  “ The  New  World  Movement 
of  the  Norther  7i  Baptist  Convention"  I find  this  pertinent 
inquiry — “ How  did  the  Church  come  to  be?” 

The  answer,  viewed  in  the  light  of  Holy  Scripture, 
is  not  only  unique,  original,  but  altogether  remark- 
able as  a characteristic  expression  of  the  new  world 
movement. 

Since  it  has  received  a safe  conduct  from  the 
Northern  Baptist  Convention  it  must  be  the  voicing 
of  that  body. 

We  are  told  with  great  assurance  that  were  the 


36 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


Church  wiped  out  tomorrow  a “new  one  would 
spring  up.’’ 

And  what  think  you  is  the  principle  by  which  it 
is  to  spring  up,  the  principle  by  which  it  was  caused 
to  spring  up  at  first? 

This  is  the  principle! 

Listen  to  it: 

“Where  there  is  a common  interest  people  in- 
stantly group  themselves  together,  something  within 
the  human  breast  says,  ‘There  is  one  of  your  own 
kind;  get  together;’  and  the  club,  the  fraternity, 
the  Church  springs  into  being.’’ 

According  to  this  definition  the  Church  is  the 
natural,  the  logical  outworking  of  the  human,  the 
social,  the  club  and  fraternity  interest. 

The  definition  of  the  New  Testament  is  alto- 
gether different. 

According  to  the  New  Testament,  the  Church 
exists,  not  because  of  the  fraternal  feeling  in  man, 
not  because  of  social  necessity,  but  because  the 
risen  Lord  breathed  on  His  disciples  and  bade  them 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  On  that  resurrection 
night  He  imparted  to  them  something  which  previ- 
ously did  not  reside  in  them  and  could  not  possibly 
have  sprung  up  out  of  them. 

The  suggestion  about  the  Church  being  wiped 
out  tomorrow  is  nearer  truth  than  the  writer  of  it 
evidently  imagines. 

The  Church  at  Laodicea  is,  according  to  the  Word 
of  God,  the  culmination  of  the  professing  Church  in 
this  age.  The  Lord  Himself  tells  us  so.  He  says 
He  will  eventually  spew  it  out  of  His  mouth.  That 


37 


W H I / AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


is,  He  will  reject  it  as  the  expression  of  His  mouth , 
the  utterance  of  His  Word,  His  witness  on  the  earth 
even  as  He  set  aside  the  Jew. 

So  far  from  springing  up  again  the  next  chapter 
tells  us  the  truly  regenerated  in  the  professing 
Church  will  be  caught  up  to  Heaven  to  meet  the 
Lord  and  wait  with  Him  there  till  the  ordained 
moment  when  with  Him  they  shall  come  forth  as  the 
true  and  adorned  Bride,  not  to  inaugurate  Christian- 
ity afresh,  but  to  set  up  the  promised  and  covenant 
kingdom  of  Christ. 

But  as  the  teachers  of  the  Inter  church  Move- 
ment appear  to  be  wholly  blind  to  dispensational 
truth,  look  upon  the  Church  as  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  and  therefore  a permanent  factor  in  the 
earth,  any  statement  that  the  regenerated  Church 
is  a temporary  system  and  that  Christianity  is  to 
give  way  to  a kingdom  coming  from  Heaven  in  the 
person  of  a coming  King  would  be  incomprehensible. 
Nevertheless,  such  is  the  truth  and  in  itself  is  a ter- 
rific denial  of  the  origination  of  the  Church  by  any 
fraternal  necessity  in  the  breast  of  man. 

We  are  told  in  the  same  article  that — 

“ Jesus  gave  the  Jews  an  ideal  far  beyond  the 
‘ renewal  of  the  kingdom  of  David’  ” 

It  is,  however,  of  record  when  the  angel  Gabriel 
announced  to  Mary  she  had  been  chosen  of  God  to 
be  the  Mother  of  Jesus;  that  He  should  be  miracu- 
lously conceived;  that  she  should  be  mother  and 
yet  virgin  he  affirmed,  not  only  that  the  Child 
should  be  called  the  Son  of  the  Highest,  but  that 


38 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


God  should  give  Him  the  throne  of  His  father 
David;  that  He  should  reign  over  the  house  of 
Jacob  forever,  and  that  of  His  kingdom  (the  king- 
dom of  His  father  David)  there  should  be  no  end. 

It  is  also  of  the  genealogical  record  by  Luke 
that  He  was  descended  through  His  Mother  from 
David  and  in  the  line  of  Nathan. 

Matthew  is  equally  careful  and  precise  to  give  us 
the  descent  of  His  adopted  father  Joseph  from 
David  in  the  line  of  Solomon. 

Matthew  tells  us  Joseph  was  the  son  of  Jacob. 

Luke  assures  us  he  was  the  son  of  Heli. 

He  could  not  be  the  actual  son  of  both. 

He  was  the  actual  son  of  Jacob. 

He  was  therefore  the  son-in-law  of  Heli. 

As  he  married  Mary,  then  Mary  was  the  daughter 
of  Heli.  As  Heli  was  descended  from  David  through 
Nathan  and  Nathan’s  had  become  the  reigning  line, 
he  was  a prince  of  the  House  of  David  and  lineal 
heir  of  David’s  throne,  and  Mary,  his  daughter,  a 
princess  of  that  house. 

Joseph  came  down  from  David  through  Solo- 
mon, but  at  Coniah,  because  of  the  wickedness  of 
that  king,  God  swerved  the  line  of  inheritance  from 
Solomon  to  Nathan.  The  descendants  of  Coniah 
were  princes,  had  full  and  proper  title  as  such,  but 
no  legal  right  to  sit  upon  the  throne.  Joseph  was  a 
prince,  therefore,  but  with  no  thronal  rights.  When 
he  married  Mary,  however,  his  title  passed  over  to 
her  Son,  the  Son  of  a princess;  thus  was  Jesus 
doubly  prince  of  the  House  of  David  and  heir  of  the 
throne — legally  on  the  side  of  His  adopted  father  in 


39 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


that  he  was  recipient  of  the  title,  and  lineally  on  the 
side  of  His  mother. 

If  it  were  true  He  came  to  give  the  Jews  a better 
ideal  than  the  renewal  of  the  kingdom  of  David  and 
take  the  place  which  prophecy  and  covenant  made 
sure  for  Him,  then  the  Holy  Ghost  went  to  a lot  of 
useless  genealogical  pains  to  prove  Him  to  be  the 
Son  of  David. 

If  it  be  true  He  came  to  give  the  Jews  a better 
ideal  than  a renewal  of  the  kingdom  of  David,  He 
Himself  went  to  a lot  of  worthless  and  theatrical 
pains  in  sending  His  disciples  to  get  the  colt  the  foal 
of  an  ass  and  then  riding  into  Jerusalem  on  the  day 
we  call  Palm  Sunday;  and  equally  amazing  that  the 
people  should  obey  the  injunction  of  the  prophet — 
shout  aloud  and  cry  till  Jerusalem  echoed  and  echoed 
again,  “Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David:  Blessed  is 
he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord;  Hosanna 
in  the  highest.  Blessed  is  the  king  of  Israel.” 

It  is  equally  astounding  that  He  should  ride  in 
this  kingly  and  Davidic  fashion  into  Jerusalem  in 
the  exact  year,  in  the  exact  month,  at  the  very  hour, 
minute  and  second  foretold  by  the  angel  Gabriel  to 
Daniel  in  Babylon  centuries  before. 

It  is  further  of  record  that  He  was  put  to  death, 
not  as  a religious  teacher,  not  because  He  expressed 
an  ideal  beyond  that  of  a renewal  of  the  kingdom  of 
David,  but  as  a political  disturber,  as  one  guilty  of 
sedition  against  Rome  and  her  authority.  He  had 
announced  to  His  disciples  that  they  should  sit  on 
twelve  thrones  and  rule  with  Him  over  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel.  Pilate  abjured  Him  to  say  whether 


40 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


He  had  made  these  claims,  whether  He  considered 
Himself  to  be  the  King  of  the  Jews.  He  answered 
Pilate  in  the  strongest  possible  form  of  affirmation. 
He  said  Pilate  had  simply  repeated  the  truth  in 
asking  Him  the  question.  He  was  King  and  with 
such  high  and  Heaven-given  authority  that  neither 
He  nor  His  disciples  were  called  upon  to  maintain  it 
as  the  kingdoms  of  mere  earthly  power,  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword.  So  convinced  was  the  Roman  that 
Jesus  claimed  to  be  King  that  he  caused  His  accus- 
ation to  be  written  over  His  cross:  “This  is  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  King  of  the  Jews. 

But  the  record  in  this  matter  goes  still  further: 

The  Apostle  Peter  speaking  to  the  multitude  in 
Jerusalem  announced  to  them  that  if  they  would 
but  repent,  accept  this  Jesus  of  Nazareth  whom  they 
had  caused  to  be  crucified,  but  who  had  risen  from 
the  dead  and  ascended  to  Heaven,  God  the  Father 
would  send  Him  back  to  be  their  triumphant  King, 
give  Him  the  throne  of  David  and  fulfill  the 
prophecy  of  the  second  psalm  that  He  would  set 
His  King  upon  His  holy  hill  of  Zion. 

But  further  still,  when  the  first  ecumenical 
council  met  in  Jerusalem  the  Apostle  James  speak- 
ing by  the  Holy  Spirit  declared  that  Christianity 
was  but  a temporary  proposition;  that  this  was  the 
age,  not  of  universal  conversion,  but  of  election;  that 
an  elect  Church  should  be  called  out  and  completed  in 
this  age;  after  that  the  Lord  would  return  and  build 
up  the  tabernacle  (the  House,  the  Throne)  of  David 
that  had  fallen  down;  in  other  words,  bring  in  a re- 
newal of  the  actual  and  covenant  kingdom  of  David. 


41 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


But  again,  and  wonderfully,  it  is  of  record  that 
when  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  Revelation  we  have 
a vision  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  Heaven  with  the 
Church  which  the  fourth  chapter  shows  He  gathered 
there  at  the  sound  of  His  voice  like  a trumpet,  He 
is  seen  as  the  Lamb  that  had  been  slain,  now 
risen  from  the  dead,  and  declared  to  be  “The 
Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  Root  of  David” 
(His  kingly,  Jewish  and  Davidic  title).  Thus  in 
in  Heaven  He  is  declared  to  be  Son  of  David,  Root 
of  David,  therefore  David’s  Lord,  David’s  God  and 
glorified  King  of  the  Jews.  He  is  represented  as 
taking  a seven  sealed  book,  the  title  deeds  of  His 
Davidic  kingdom.  When  He  does  so  the  enthroned 
Church  salutes  Him,  confesses  redemption  through 
His  blood  as  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  and  bursts  forth 
into  a paean  of  praise  that  with  Him  she  shall  reign 
over  the  earth.  He  breaks  the  seals  of  the  book  and 
sends  abroad  those  judgments  that  are  to  cleanse 
the  earth  of  all  things  that  offend  and  at  their 
climax  comes  Himself  in  judgment  as  the  Lion  of  the 
Tribe  of  Judah,  as  David’s  Son,  to  set  up  a king- 
dom which  shall  find  its  center  in  Jerusalem  and  its 
circumference  in  the  whole  world. 

It  is  abundantly  safe,  therefore,  and  of  inexorable 
logic  to  say  this  concept  that  Jesus  came  into  the 
world  to  give  the  Jews  an  ideal  far  beyond  the  re- 
newal of  the  kingdom  of  David  finds  no  other  source 
nor  authority  than  in  the  sentiment  and  imagination 
of  those  who  invent  it;  it  is  simply  an  expression  of 
the  unscriptural  idea  that  the  Church  is  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  the  higher  evolution  of  the  Davidic  king- 


42 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


dom  and  the  working  hypothesis  by  which  the  Inter- 
church Movement  has  the  audacity  to  go  before  the 
Church  and  the  world  and  demand  their  millions. 

Somewhere  in  the  Interchurch  Movement  literature 
I have  read  that  Jesus  was  a “ propagandist  ” a “ giver 
of  great  ideas.” 

Can  you  conceive  of  anything  more  levelling  than 
that? 

He  was  neither  propagandist  nor  merely  a giver 
of  ideas. 

He  was  something  altogether  more  than  either. 

Speech  concerning  Him  must  needs  take  off  its 
shoes  as  on  holy  ground. 

Concept  concerning  Him  is  under  bonds  to  wrap 
itself  in  the  white,  spotless  robes  of  profoundest 
adoration. 

A propagandist  sits  in  a swivel  chair  in  his  office, 
dictates  circular  letters,  has  his  key  men,  his  alert 
men  and  an  army  of  waiting  factotums. 

A giver  of  ideas  may  stand  on  a platform,  some- 
times, actually,  may  be  found  in  a pulpit,  he  not  in- 
frequently occupies  a soap  box  and  harrangues. 

To  speak  of  God’s  Christ  as  a propagandist  and 
a giver  of  ideas  is,  suddenly  and  ruthlessly  to  take 
the  [nimbus  and  the  crown  from  His  head  and  jostle 
Him  indifferently  into  the  midst  and  on  the  level 
with  a noisy  crowd  of  little  men,  each  man  swelled 
and  bloated  with  his  own  importance,  attempting 
painfully  to  give  birth  to  an  idea,  but  an  idea  shriv- 
elled and  small  and  utterly  valueless  in  the  clear  rays 
of  an  unsympathetic  sunlight. 


43 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


The  Christ  of  God  was  human.  There  need  be 
no  question  about  that,  nor  the  realism  of  His 
humanity.  He  was  compassionate,  tender,  an  ex- 
quisitely constructed  organ  specifically  “prepared” 
of  God,  played  upon  in  all  His  octaves  by  every  sigh 
heaved  from  a human  breast,  by  every  tear  distilled 
from  a heart  of  woe — so  responsive  that  He  absorbed 
both  sighs  and  tears  and  became  a Man  of  Sorrows 
and  acquainted  with  grief,  the  grief,  the  sorrow  and 
anguish  of  other  lives.  Like  sunlight  which  reveals 
the  unclean  but  takes  no  stain,  He  received  sinners, 
ate  with  them  and  remained  the  Holy  One  of 
God,  the  sinless,  perfect  man;  yet  was  He  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  God  enthroned  in  humanity. 

Propagandist  and  Giver  of  ideas! 

In  His  presence  the  words  grow  worse  than  cheap, 
they  become  vulgar  and  strained  and  very  sordid. 

He  did  not  come  into  the  world  to  start  a cru- 
sade and  win  a crowd. 

No!  passing  beyond  the  gate  of  Judah’s  foreseen 
refusal  to  profit  by  the  things  that  made  for  her 
peace  in  the  day  of  her  visitation  by  Him  as  her 
ordained  King,  He  went  forth  to  be  a sacrifice  both 
for  Israel  in  their  blindness  and  for  that  Gentile 
world  that  seemed  to  lie  outside  the  covenant. 

Today,  on  the  throne  of  the  Highest,  He  is  the 
Second  Man,  the  Last  Adam,  the  Giver  of  new  and 
potential  life  to  those  who  will  own  and  receive  Him 
as  such. 

Mahomet,  Buddah,  Zoroaster  and  the  rest  of 
them  were  propagandists;  Jesus  our  Lord  is  Son  of 
God  and  God  the  Son,  the  Author  and  Giver  of 


44 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


that  life  that  is  to  be  crowned  at  last  with  immor- 
tality. 

There  are,  beyond  all  doubt  or  question,  large 
numbers  of  earnest  and  devout  men  in  the  Inter- 
church Movement,  or,  rather,  who  are  supporting 
that  movement;  men  who  seriously  believe  the  work 
of  the  Church  is  to  convert  the  world  by  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Gospel,  reorganize  it  socially,  permeate 
it  governmentally  with  the  spirit  of  Christ,  the 
grace  of  His  unselfishness  and  love,  and  to  whom  the 
“survey”  reports  of  a world  in  sin  and  spiritual  dark- 
ness profoundly  and  movingly  appeal. 

No  doubt  there  are  many  among  them  who 
believe  in  a whole  Bible,  but  have  not,  as  yet, 
awakened  to  the  full  mind  of  God  as  set  forth  in 
that  inspired  and  infallible  Word. 

They  are,  nevertheless,  on  a course  which  leads 
more  and  more  away  from  the  Lord,  yields  more  and 
more  to  the  sentiment  and  imagination  of  men  and 
opens  the  door  for  the  teaching  and  influence  of 
those  who  do  not  accept  an  unexpurgated  edition  of 
the  Scriptures,  those  who  are  steadily  leading  the 
professing  Church  to  descend  from  the  plane  of  the 
supernatural  to  the  plane  of  the  natural  and  merely 
ethical  or  humanitarian,  bringing  it  down  from  the 
highlands  of  spiritual  efficiency  to  the  low  and  sin- 
burned  heath  of  the  flesh  and  the  ways  of  the  flesh, 
to  the  energy  of  man  and  the  capitalization  of  his 
many  inventions. 

Through  this  Interchurch  Movement  there  is  a 
growing  danger  of  erecting  an  ecclesiastical  autoc- 
racy which  will  compel  the  surrender  of  that  individ- 


45 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


ualism  and  independency  without  which  the  as- 
semblies of  Christ  cannot  receive  available  contact 
with  the  power  and  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

There  never  was  time  when  the  Church  needed 
to  be  so  free  from  the  clogging  and  retroactive  effect 
of  machinery,  so  free  from  the  aggressive  influence 
of  what  is  called  with  glib  utterance  the  “get  to- 
gether,” the  “cooperative”  magic  that  promises 
successful  achievement.  When  analyzed  these 
phrases  mean  the  compacting  of  human  energy  and 
offer  the  most  vicious  principle  that  could  be  oper- 
ative in  a Church  of  Christ;  for,  it  ought  to  be  ab- 
solutely clear  that  the  power  of  a Church  is  in 
direct  ratio  to  the  denial  of  human  energy  and  the 
complete  recognition  that  God  again  and  again  hath 
chosen  the  weak  things  to  confound  the  mighty, 
things  which  are  not  to  bring  to  naught  things  that 
are.  It  is  a fixed  law  in  the  divine  economy  that  no 
flesh  shall  glory  in  the  Lord’s  presence. 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is  building  a colossal 
machine. 

It  is  organizing  a tentacular,  octupus  power  that 
will,  sooner  or  later,  make  it  difficult  for  pastors  and 
churches  to  act  as  they  may  deem  themselves  led, 
apart  from  this  outside  and  growing  dictation. 

Letter  after  letter  that  I receive  from  pastors 
has  in  it  a protest  against  the  movement,  not  be- 
cause they  are  lacking  in  desire  to  give  themselves 
in  full  surrender  to  the  Lord;  not  because  they  do  not 
wish  to  lead  their  Church  into  the  spirit  of  liberal 
giving  and  the  widest  proclamation  of  the  Gospel 
in  mission  fields  till  throughout  the  earth  every 


46 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


soul  shall  have  heard  of  the  saving  power  of  a risen 
Lord,  but  because  there  is  a persistent  consciousness 
that  its  methods  and  doctrine  are  not  according  to 
the  mind  of  God;  that  it  is  dishonoring  to  the  head- 
ship of  Christ  and  a limitation  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
a denial  that  He  comes  and  goes  where  He  listeth 
and  an  effort  to  confine  Him  to  the  predetermined 
plans  of  men.  There  is  a widespread  feeling  that 
this  movement  does  not  exalt  the  authority  of 
Holy  Scripture,  making  it  the  determining  standard 
of  action,  and  that  there  is  in  it  a subtle  breaking 
down  of  the  old  faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the 
saints;  along  with  the  protests  in  these  letters  is  a 
feeling  that  in  keeping  out  of  the  movement  they 
may  be  overrun  by  it  as  by  a juggernaut  and  crushed 
as  to  standing,  position  and  influence. 

I am  satisfied  that  five  years  of  this  Interchurch 
Movement,  if  compactly  persisted  in,  will  succeed 
in  discounting  the  Bible  as  the  infallible  Word  of 
God,  will  bring  Protestantism  together,  not  on  the 
basis  of  a sacrificial,  but  an  ethical,  Christ,  will  shut 
out  the  vision  of  Him  as  risen  Lord,  risen  in  the  body 
in  which  He  died,  make  a pariah  of  the  overwhelm- 
ing Scripture  doctrine  of  the  Second  Coming,  turn 
the  minds  of  men  away  from  the  hereafter,  the 
wonders  of  Heaven,  the  woes  of  Hell  and  bring  the 
Church  to  the  function  of  a mere  society  for  com- 
petitive morality,  a rival  factor  with  socialistic 
clubs  and  systems  in  the  endeavor  to  exalt  time, 
forget  eternity  and  make  the  life  that  now  is  the 
worth-while  life  and  this  world  as  the  only  arena  for 
the  unfolding  of  the  soul. 


47 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


This  Interchurch  Movement,  however  much  it 
may  be  disguised,  however  much  it  may  use  the 
nomenclature  of  the  old  faith,  however  much  it  may 
repeat  the  name  of  Christ  and  call  to  service  and 
contribution  in  His  name,  is  a well-concealed  device 
of  Satan  to  bring  in  the  apostasy,  turn  the  Church 
away  from  its  commission  to  save  men  for  eternity, 
and  softly,  speciously,  spread  before  the  world  a 
system  of  righteousness  that  never  was  woven  on  the 
loom  of  the  cross,  a righteousness  that  has  not  a single 
stain  of  sacrificial  blood  in  all  its  filaments. 

It  is  a scheme  of  Satan  (transformed  as  an  angel 
of  light)  to  bring  into  the  Church  and  proclaim 
from  its  pulpits  his  ministry  of  a bloodless  righteous- 
ness; to  install  in  the  Church  the  offering  of  Cain 
with  all  its  fruit,  flowers  and  fluttering  birds,  shutting 
out  of  view  Abel’s  lamb,  its  streaming  blood  and  fire 
of  acceptance  from  an  approving  God;  in  short, 
the  new  movement  repudiates  the  old  theology  as  the 
theology  of  the  shambles,  rejects  with  bitterness  the 
doctrine  of  vicarious  sacrifice  on  the  part  of  Christ, 
lowers  Him  to  the  level  of  an  extraordinarily  good 
man,  a propagandist,  a giver  of  ideas  with  socialistic 
tendencies;  it  is  old  Socianianism  come  in  company 
with  Cain  to  town  again,  exhales  the  breath  and 
expands  the  atnosphere  of  unregenerate  Unitarian- 
ism,  leading  the  natural  man  to  rest  with  self- 
satisfied  comfort  in  his  own  righteousness  and  turn 
his  back  on  the  righteousness  of  God. 

I protest  against  this  Inter  church  Movement, 
accelerated  as  it  will  be  by  mass,  by  combination 
might,  by  engineered  enthusiasm  and  almost  rioting 


48 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


in  its  formidable  bulk  of  systematically-gathered 
millions,  as  one  of  the  signs  of  the  times  and  as 
characteristic  fulfillment  of  Paul’s  prophecy  that 
the  professing  Church  would  not  endure  sound 
doctrine;  that  teachers  who  delighted  to  tickle  the 
ear  with  pleasing  sensations  should  turn  them 
from  the  truth  and  they  should  be  turned  to  the 
fables  and  imaginations  of  men. 

I counsel  all  preachers  who  know  the  truth,  who 
believe  in  a whole  Bible  and  the  faith  once  for  all 
delivered  to  the  saints,  who  know  the  Coming  of 
our  Lord  to  be,  not  a fiction,  but  a blessed  fact, 
who  hold  it  as  an  imminent  hope  and  walk  in  the 
light  of  it — to  stand  apart  from  this  Interchurch 
World  Movement,  this  movement  that  makes  no 
provision  for  a returning  Lord,  has  no  hope,  nor 
expectation,  nor  desire  that  He  will  return  and  in 
its  exaltation  of  an  ethical  Christ  almost  forgets 
to  speak  of  His  cross  and  even  when  it  does  fails  to 
see  the  blood  shed  there  was  the  blood  of  sacrifice, 
has  no  warning  vision  of  the  gathering  judgments 
that  are  to  break  on  a sleeping  world,  in  its  exploita- 
tion of  the  life  that  now  is  and  the  crowding  needs  of 
the  present  hour  has  little  room  to  speak  of  that 
which  is  to  come,  and  in  its  determination  to  save 
society  in  bulk  and  make  a new  world  according  to 
the  architecture  of  man,  turns  from  the  individual 
soul  standing  on  the  edge  of  eternity  without 
Christ,  having  no  hope  and  without  God  in  the 
world. 

I counsel  all  who  would  be  faithful  to  the  truth 
in  this  crucial  hour  to  redouble  their  efforts  to 


49 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


preach  the  Gospel  of  a crucified  and  risen  Christ, 
lead  the  Church  over  whom  God  may  have  ap- 
pointed them  to  greater  liberality,  to  a more  pro- 
found apprehension  and  realization  of  the  respon- 
sibility of  money  stewardship  and  to  a more  de- 
termined and  systematic  missionary  effort — but 
under  no  circumstance  to  accept  favors  from  nor 
recognize  the  Movement  as  an  instrument  or  channel 
for  their  service. 


Summary 

The  Interchurch  Movement  is  a Post-millennial 
drive. 

It  confounds  the  kingdom  of  Christ  with  the 
Church  of  Christ. 

It  confounds  the  Gospel  of  grace  with  the  Gospel 
of  the  kingdom. 

It  is  a socialistic,  educational  and  ethical  cam- 
paign. 

It  is  organized  for  money  with  greater  detail  than 
for  power  from  God. 

It  dictates  budgets  for  churches  and  arranges 
worldly  methods  to  raise  them. 

It  seeks  to  save  society  rather  than  “pluck  a 
few  brands  from  the  burning.” 

It  reverses  the  whole  commission  and  charter  of 
Christ. 

It  talks  more  about  the  Christ  who  lived  on 
earth  than  the  Christ  who  died  on  the  cross. 

It  preaches  regeneration,  but  means  regener- 
ation of  society. 


50 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


It  speaks  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  but  means  his 
moral,  and  not  his  penal,  sacrifice. 

It  tells  us  Christ  poured  out  His  soul  into  the 
soul  of  others.  By  that  it  means  He  poured  His 
enthusiasm  into  His  disciples,  but  it  says  nothing 
about  the  pouring  out  of  His  soul  unto  death  to  save 
others. 

It  preaches  a social,  rather  than  a personal, 
Gospel. 

It  seeks  to  save  society,  rather  than  the  in- 
dividual. 

It  makes  civilization  and  not  salvation  the 
supreme  purpose  of  the  Church. 

It  talks  of  the  teachings,  ideals  and  principles  of 
Christ  and  not  of  the  atoning  blood  of  Christ. 

It  sets  up  Christ  in  life  as  an  exemplar  of  right- 
eousness, rather  than  through  death  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  unto  all  and  upon  all  them  that  believe. 

It  talks  more  of  citizenship  in  America  than 
citizenship  in  Heaven. 

It  is  occupied  with  the  life  that  now  is,  and  not 
so  much  with  the  life  that  is  to  come. 

It  says  little  of  Heaven  and  appears  to  have  for- 
gotten there  is  a Hell. 

It  teaches  all  men  are  sons  of  God.  It  stands  for 
the  Fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brotherhood  of  man. 

It  makes  the  Golden  Rule  and  not  a returning 
Christ  the  remedy  for  the  world’s  unrest. 

It  seeks  to  make  the  world  a better  world  in 
contradiction  to  the  Son  of  God  who  says  it  is  a 
doomed  world  and  on  the  way  as  a system  from 
bad  to  worse. 


51 


WHY  I AM  OPPOSED  TO  THE 


It  denies  the  Second  Coming  of  Christ  as  the 
Blessed  Hope  of  the  Church. 

It  exhorts  the  Church  to  be  taken  up  with  com- 
munity interests  while  the  Son  of  God  exhorts  the 
Church  to  come  out  and  be  separate  from  the 
community. 

It  has  nothing  to  say  about  forgiveness  of  sins 
through  redemption  by  blood. 

It  does  not  warn  about  the  second  death  and  the 
certainty  of  eternal  punishment. 

It  opens  the  door  of  opportunity  for  Satan 
(as  an  angel  of  light)  to  introduce  into  the  Church 
his  ministry  of  a bloodless  righteousness. 

It  sometimes  uses  evangelical  language,  but  in 
teaching  denies  it. 

It  fills  the  Church  with  the  machinery  of  man  and 
not  the  energy  of  God. 

It  seeks  to  build  a kingdom  for  Christ  to  which  it 
never  expects  Him  visibly  and  personally  to  come. 

It  supports  theological  seminaries  that  are  not 
faithful  to  the  Word,  undermine  the  authority  of 
Scripture  and  graduate  men  who  repudiate  a whole 
Bible. 

It  is  a menace  to  the  authority  of  Holy  Scripture, 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  upbuilding 
of  a spiritual  Church. 

It  is  organizing  an  ecclesiastical  autocracy,  a 
compelling  spirit  of  dictatorship  that  will  override 
pastoral  liberty  and  destroy  assembly  independence. 

It  is  one  of  the  foretold  signs  of  the  Great  Apos- 
tasy, the  end  of  the  age,  the  Coming  of  Christ,  His 
repudiation  of  the  professing  Church  and  a warning 


52 


INTERCHURCH  WORLD  MOVEMENT 


to  all  who  know  the  truth  to  refuse  it  fellowship, 
stand  apart  from  it,  give  it  no  support,  but  openly, 
publicly  and  unfailingly  as  occasion  may  occur  and 
responsibility  demand,  to  testify  against  it  as  of 
man  and  not  of  God. 

It  is  Modern  Theology  in  the  disguise  of  evangeli- 
cal and  missionary  appeal.  It  has  the  hands  of 
Esau,  but  the  unchanged  voice  of  Jacob. 

The  preacher  who  professes  to  be  a premillenarian 
and  yet  supports  it  is  either  grossly  ignorant  of  the 
logic  of  his  profession  or  lacks  the  courage  of  his  con- 
victions. 


53 


